|
Lingle, S., Rendall, D., Wilson, W. F., DeYoung, R. W., & Pellis, S. M. (2007). Altruism and recognition in the antipredator defence of deer: 2. Why mule deer help nonoffspring fawns. Anim. Behav., 73(5), 907–916.
Abstract: Both white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus, and mule deer, O. hemionus, females defend fawns against coyotes, Canis latrans, but only mule deer defend nonoffspring conspecific and heterospecific fawns. During a predator attack, females may have to decide whether to defend a fawn while having imperfect information on its identity obtained from hearing a few distress calls. Although imperfect recognition can influence altruistic behaviour, few empirical studies have considered this point when testing functional explanations for altruism. We designed a series of playback experiments with fawn distress calls to test alternative hypotheses (by-product of parental care, kin selection, reciprocal altruism) for the mule deer's defence of nonoffspring, specifically allowing for the possibility that females mistake these fawns for their own. White-tailed deer females approached the speaker only when distress calls of white-tailed deer fawns were played and when their own fawn was hidden, suggesting that fawn defence was strictly a matter of parental care in this species. In contrast, mule deer females responded similarly and strongly, regardless of the caller's identity, the female's reproductive state (mother or nonmother) or the presence of their own offspring. The failure of mule deer females to adjust their responses to these conditions suggests that they do not defend nonoffspring because they mistake them for their own fawns. The lack of behavioural discrimination also suggests that kin selection, reciprocal altruism and defence of the offspring's area are unlikely to explain the mule deer's defence of nonoffspring. We identify causal and functional questions that still need to be addressed to understand why mule deer defend fawns so indiscriminately.
|
|
|
Scordato, E. S., & Drea, C. M. (2007). Scents and sensibility: information content of olfactory signals in the ringtailed lemur, Lemur catta. Anim. Behav., 73(2), 301–314.
Abstract: The function of olfactory signalling in social species is less well understood than in asocial species. Consequently, we examined olfactory communication in the ringtailed lemur, a socially complex primate that retains a functional vomeronasal organ, has well-developed scent glands and shows a suite of scent-marking behaviour. To assess the information content of different types of scent gland secretions, we decoupled olfactory cues from the visual and behavioural modalities with which scent marking is normally associated. We presented male and female subjects (signal receivers) with a series of choice tests between odours derived from conspecific donors (signal senders) varying by sex, age, social status and reproductive condition. We additionally examined the influence of the receivers' reproductive state and familiarity with the signaller. The reproductive condition, social status and familiarity of senders and receivers affected signal transmission; specifically, male receivers attended most to the odours of conspecifics in breeding condition and to the odours of familiar, dominant animals. By contrast, females varied their responses according to both their own reproductive state and that of the sender. Based on male and female patterns of countermarking, we suggest that scent marking serves a function in intergroup spacing and intrasexual competition for both sexes, as might be expected in a female-dominant species. By contrast, minimal female interest in male odours counters a female mate choice function for scent marking in this species. Nevertheless, scent marks are critical to male-male competition and, therefore, may be subject to sexual selection.
|
|
|
Rybarczyk, P., Koba, Y., Rushen, J., Tanida, H., & de Passille, A. M. (2001). Can cows discriminate people by their faces? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 74(3), 175–189.
Abstract: This experiment examines the cues used by cattle to discriminate between people, particularly the role played by facial cues. We trained and tested eight Holstein cows 5 days each week for 2 months. For each cow, we used two people, a rewarder and a non-rewarder, of different size and dressed in overalls of the same colour. The operant chamber was a large box within which stood the two people. The cow could see, smell and touch each person. A lever was placed in front of each person. When the cow pushed the lever in front of the rewarder, it received 75 g of concentrate and nothing when it pushed on the other one. For each test session, the cows made 10 choices. The placement of the people was determined randomly according to the Gellerman series. The success criterion was defined as at least eight correct choices out of 10 trials for two consecutive sessions (binomial law P<0.003). During the shaping, seven cows out of eight learned to press the lever to obtain the food. The cows were then tested in a series of 10 trials with only the rewarder present. Seven out of seven cows succeeded in reaching the success criterion. In experiment 1, both the rewarder and the non-rewarder were present and standing upright at normal height and in full view of the cow. Five out of seven cows achieved the success criterion. In experiment 2, the cows could see only the faces of the two people. None of the cows were able to reach the success criterion. In experiment 3, both people were present standing up and wearing identical masks that completely covered their heads. Five cows out of five achieved the success criterion. In experiment 4, we changed the relative height of the people. Five cows out of five succeeded when the two people stood so they were of equal height but with their faces visible. However, no cows succeeded when the people were both of equal height and had their faces covered. This study suggests that cows seem to use multiple cues to discriminate between people. Cows appear able to use either body height or the face to discriminate between people but use of the face alone is more difficult when the cows cannot see the rest of the body.
|
|
|
Ligout, S., Porter, R. H., & Bon, R. (2002). Social discrimination in lambs: persistence and scope. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 76(3), 239–248.
Abstract: Social recognition among familiar unrelated lambs was assessed in a series of tests. Lambs and their mothers were housed together in small groups for 1 week (Original groups; O) then reorganized into new groupings (Recent-groups; R) for the remainder of the experiment. During test series 1, lambs that were paired with a familiar O-group partner, from which they had been separated for 5 days, emitted fewer distress bleats than did those tested with an unfamiliar partner. This same effect was not evident when the test was repeated several hours later, indicating that the animals had become habituated to the testing procedures. Two days later, when given the choice between an O- versus a R-partner (test series 2), lambs did not display a preference for either of the stimulus lambs. However, in an additional two-choice test (test series 3) the subject lambs responded discriminatively to a recent familiar partner that was simultaneously present with an unfamiliar lamb. Overall, the results suggest that lambs are capable of developing discriminative relationships with age-mates from different sub-groups, and that such social discrimination persists over a separation period lasting at least several days. It is not clear whether lambs recognize several individual conspecifics per se or discriminate between members of higher order social categories (e.g. familiar versus unfamiliar individuals). Proximal and distal social discrimination may be mediated by different combinations of sensory modalities.
|
|
|
Patris, B., Perrier, G., Schaal, B., & Coureaud, G. (2008). Early development of filial preferences in the rabbit: implications of nursing- and pheromone-induced odour learning? Anim. Behav., 76(2), 305–314.
Abstract: Newborn rabbits, Oryctolagus cuniculus, discriminate between different categories of adult conspecifics on the basis of their abdominal odour cues. Whether these cues can support the development of filial preferences has not been adequately tested. Using a two-choice paradigm, we assessed the ability of 3-8-day-old pups to orient selectively to the mother versus an unfamiliar female, either spontaneously or after odour conditioning. In experiment 1, nonconditioned pups roamed indifferently over the mother and an unfamiliar female. In experiment 2, pups conditioned to a neutral odorant while nursing or with the mammary pheromone became attracted by the odorant. In experiment 3, pups that had learned the odorant while nursing oriented for longer to any female carrying it, but the unscented mother and a scented unfamiliar female were equally attractive. Finally, in experiment 4, pups that had learned the odorant paired with the mammary pheromone showed a preference for their scented mother, but not systematically for a scented unfamiliar female; furthermore, they were equally attracted by the unscented mother and a scented unfamiliar female. In sum, pups did not spontaneously evince an olfactory preference for the mother when opposed to an unfamiliar female, although they seemed able to detect individual maternal odours. In fact, they appeared to react to both species-specific cues and individual cues that they had learned, and their responses depended on their degree of familiarity with the cues and on the context. The mammary pheromone by itself might act as both a releasing and a reinforcing signal in these early socially oriented behaviours.
|
|
|
Nakagawa, S., & Waas, J. R. (2004). 'O sibling, where art thou?' – A review of avian sibling recognition with respect to the mammalian literature. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 79(1), 101–119.
Abstract: Avian literature on sibling recognition is rare compared to that developed by mammalian researchers. We compare avian and mammalian research on sibling recognition to identify why avian work is rare, how approaches differ and what avian and mammalian researchers can learn from each other. Three factors: (1) biological differences between birds and mammals, (2) conceptual biases and (3) practical constraints, appear to influence our current understanding. Avian research focuses on colonial species because sibling recognition is considered adaptive where 'mixing potential' of dependent young is high; research on a wider range of species, breeding systems and ecological conditions is now needed. Studies of acoustic recognition cues dominate avian literature; other types of cues (e.g. visual, olfactory) deserve further attention. The effect of gender on avian sibling recognition has yet to be investigated; mammalian work shows that gender can have important influences. Most importantly, many researchers assume that birds recognise siblings through 'direct familiarisation' (commonly known as associative learning or familiarity); future experiments should also incorporate tests for 'indirect familiarisation' (commonly known as phenotype matching). If direct familiarisation proves crucial, avian research should investigate how periods of separation influence sibling discrimination. Mammalian researchers typically interpret sibling recognition in broad functional terms (nepotism, optimal outbreeding); some avian researchers more successfully identify specific and testable adaptive explanations, with greater relevance to natural contexts. We end by reporting exciting discoveries from recent studies of avian sibling recognition that inspire further interest in this topic.
|
|
|
Drummond, H. (2006). Dominance in vertebrate broods and litters. Quarterly Review of Biology, 81(1), 3–32.
Abstract: Drawing on the concepts and theory of dominance in adult vertebrates, this article categorizes the relationships of dominance between infant siblings, identifies the behavioral mechanisms that give rise to those relationships, and proposes a model to explain their evolution. Dominance relationships in avian broods can be classified according to the agonistic roles of dominants and subordinates as “aggression-submission,” “aggression-resistance, ” “aggression-aggression,” “aggression-avoidance,” “rotating dominance,” and “flock dominance.” These relationships differ mainly in the submissiveness/pugnacity of subordinates, which is pivotal, and in the specificity/generality of the learning processes that underlie them. As in the dominance hierarchies of adult vertebrates, agonistic roles are engendered and maintained by several mechanisms, including differential fighting ability, assessment, trained winning and losing (especially in altricial species), learned individual relationships (especially in precocial species), site-specific learning, and probably group-level effects. An evolutionary framework in which the species-typical dominance relationship is determined by feeding mode, confinement, cost of subordination, and capacity for individual recognition, can be extended to mammalian litters and account for the aggression-submission and aggression-resistance observed in distinct populations of spotted hyenas and the “site-specific dominance” (teat ownership) of some pigs, felids, and hyraxes. Little is known about agonism in the litters of other mammals or broods of poikilotherms, but some species of fish and crocodilians have the potential for dominance among broodmates. Copyright © 2006 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
De Boyer Des Roches, A., Richard-Yris, M. - A., Henry, S., Ezzaouia, M., & Hausberger, M. (2008). Laterality and emotions: visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) differs with objects' emotional value. Physiol. Behav., 94(3), 487–490.
Abstract: Lateralization of emotions has received great attention in the last decades, both in humans and animals, but little interest has been given to side bias in perceptual processing. Here, we investigated the influence of the emotional valence of stimuli on visual and olfactory explorations by horses, a large mammalian species with two large monocular visual fields and almost complete decussation of optic fibres. We confronted 38 Arab mares to three objects with either a positive, negative or neutral emotional valence (novel object). The results revealed a gradient of exploration of the 3 objects according to their emotional value and a clear asymmetry in visual exploration. When exploring the novel object, mares used preferentially their right eyes, while they showed a slight tendency to use their left eyes for the negative object. No asymmetry was evidenced for the object with the positive valence. A trend for an asymmetry in olfactory investigation was also observed. Our data confirm the role of the left hemisphere in assessing novelty in horses like in many vertebrate species and the possible role of the right hemisphere in processing negative emotional responses. Our findings also suggest the importance of both hemispheres in the processing positive emotions. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to demonstrate clearly that the emotional valence of a stimulus induces a specific visual lateralization pattern.
|
|
|
Thor, D. H., & Holloway, W. R. (1982). Social memory of the male laboratory rat. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol., 96(6), 1000–1006.
Abstract: Used duration of social-investigatory behavior by 36 mature male Long-Evans rats as a measure of individual recognition in 5 experiments to assess social memory. In Exp I, the duration of social investigation during a 2nd exposure to the same juvenile (n[en space]=[en space]12) was directly related to the length of the interexposure interval. In Exp II, Ss were exposed to the same or different juvenile 10 min after an initial 5-min exposure to a novel juvenile; reexposure to the same juvenile elicited significantly less social investigation than an exposure to a different juvenile. Exps III and IV demonstrated that following a 5-min introductory exposure, social memory of the juvenile was relatively brief in comparison with that of mature Ss. Exp V revealed a retroactive interference effect on recently acquired memory for an individual: 12 mature Ss exposed to interpolated social experience engaged in significantly longer investigation of a juvenile than those with no interpolated social experience. The combined results suggest that (1) the rat normally engages in spontaneous learning of individual identity and (2) social memory may be a significant aspect of complex social interactions. (16 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B. M., Dindo, M., Freeman, C. A., & Hall, M. J. (2005). The monkey in the mirror: hardly a stranger. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 102(32), 11140–11147.
Abstract: It is widely assumed that monkeys see a stranger in the mirror, whereas apes and humans recognize themselves. In this study, we question the former assumption by using a detailed comparison of how monkeys respond to mirrors versus live individuals. Eight adult female and six adult male brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) were exposed twice to three conditions: (i) a familiar same-sex partner, (ii) an unfamiliar same-sex partner, and (iii) a mirror. Females showed more eye contact and friendly behavior and fewer signs of anxiety in front of a mirror than they did when exposed to an unfamiliar partner. Males showed greater ambiguity, but they too reacted differently to mirrors and strangers. Discrimination between conditions was immediate, and blind coders were able to tell the difference between monkeys under the three conditions. Capuchins thus seem to recognize their reflection in the mirror as special, and they may not confuse it with an actual conspecific. Possibly, they reach a level of self-other distinction intermediate between seeing their mirror image as other and recognizing it as self.
|
|